You limited your search to:

 Collection: Congressional Research Service Reports
Environmental Protection Agency: FY2000 Budget Issues
State and local wastewater and drinking water capital needs were the most prominent budgetary issues. Senate and House authorizing and appropriating chairmen expressed concern over the requested 17% decrease in the State and Tribal Assistance Grants account from $3.41 billion in FY1999 to $2.84 billion in FY2000. The conference agreement on H.R. 2684 provides a total of $3.47 billion. For clean water state revolving funds, the conference committee approved the Senate's level of $1.35 billion, about $175 million more than the House approved and roughly $550 million more than requested. The conference agreement included $332 million for special project grants, about $73 million more than the House's proposal, roughly $232 million more than the Senate approved, and about $304 million more than requested. For drinking water state revolving funds, the conference committee approved $820 million, $45 million more than the House's amount and $5 million less than the Senate approved and the President requested. The conference committee also approved the Administration's request of $885 million for state and tribal administrative grants, which is roughly the same as the amount enacted for FY1999. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs867/
Environmental Protection Agency: FY2001 Budget Issues
The request for state and local wastewater and drinking water capital needs was a key issue. The request of $2.91 billion for State and Tribal Assistance Grants, which fund these needs, was about one-half billion less than in FY2000. The House passed $3.18 billion, the Senate $3.32 billion, and the conferees $3.62 billion. The request included $800 million for Clean Water State Revolving Funds, $550 million less than in FY2000. The House passed $1.20 billion, the Senate $1.35 billion and the conferees $1.35 billion. Conferees approved the $825 million requested for Drinking Water State Revolving Funds. Congress denied the Administration's request for a new Clean Air Partnership program. EPA requested $100 million for Mexican border water projects and $15 million for State of Alaska projects. Conferees approved $75 million and $35 million respectively. For state and tribal administrative grants, the conferees approved roughly the requested amount of $1.0 billion. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1075/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2003 Budget
On April 9, 2001, the President requested $7.3 billion in discretionary budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for FY2002, $512.0 million (or 7%) less than the FY2001 funding level of $7.8 billion. The request would not have continued funding of about $500 million for activities earmarked for FY2001, and contained provisions shifting more enforcement responsibilities to the states. Popular wastewater infrastructure funding, state roles, and the future of Superfund were some of the predominant topics. On July 17, the House Appropriations Committee recommended $7.545 billion,$229 million more than requested (H.R. 2620, H. Rept. 107-159). digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2169/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2003 Budget
On April 9, 2001, the President requested $7.3 billion in discretionary budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for FY2002, $512.0 million (or 7%) less than the FY2001 funding level of $7.8 billion. The request would not have continued funding of about $500 million for activities earmarked for FY2001, and contained provisions shifting more enforcement responsibilities to the states. Popular wastewater infrastructure funding, state roles, and the future of Superfund were some of the predominant topics. On July 17, the House Appropriations Committee recommended $7.545 billion,$229 million more than requested (H.R. 2620, H. Rept. 107-159). digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3798/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2003 Budget
On April 9, 2001, the President requested $7.3 billion in discretionary budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for FY2002, $512.0 million (or 7%) less than the FY2001 funding level of $7.8 billion. The request would not have continued funding of about $500 million for activities earmarked for FY2001, and contained provisions shifting more enforcement responsibilities to the states. Popular wastewater infrastructure funding, state roles, and the future of Superfund were some of the predominant topics. On July 17, the House Appropriations Committee recommended $7.545 billion,$229 million more than requested (H.R. 2620, H. Rept. 107-159). digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3799/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2003 Budget
In the 107th Congress, S. 2797 (S.Rept. 107-222) would have provided $8.30 billion for EPA in FY2003. H.R. 5605 (H.Rept. 107- 740) would have provide $8.20 billion. Both bills would restore much of the water infrastructure funding but there was no final action by the end of Congress. Continuing resolutions funded at the same level as in FY2002. In the 108th Congress, P.L. 108-7 (H.J.Res. 2) provides EPA with $8.08 billion for FY2003. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3801/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2003 Budget
In the 107th Congress, S. 2797 (S.Rept. 107-222) would have provided $8.30 billion for EPA in FY2003. H.R. 5605 (H.Rept. 107- 740) would have provide $8.20 billion. Both bills would restore much of the water infrastructure funding but there was no final action by the end of Congress. Continuing resolutions funded at the same level as in FY2002. In the 108th Congress, P.L. 108-7 (H.J.Res. 2) provides EPA with $8.08 billion for FY2003. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3800/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2004 Budget
For FY2004, the President’s budget requested $7.6 billion in budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), $448 million (or 6%) less than the $8.1 billion current funding level. The House approved $8.0 billion in H.R. 2861 (H.Rept. 108-235) on July 25. Senate action is anticipated in September. The request consisted of $3.1 billion for EPA operating expenses, $3.1 billion for assisting state and local governments, and $1.4 billion for cleaning up Superfund toxic waste sites. Wastewater infrastructure needs and the future of Superfund are prominent topics. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3809/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2004 Budget
For FY2004, the President’s budget requested $7.6 billion in budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), $448 million (or 6%) less than the $8.1 billion current funding level. The House approved $8.0 billion in H.R. 2861 (H.Rept. 108-235) on July 25. Senate action is anticipated in September. The request consisted of $3.1 billion for EPA operating expenses, $3.1 billion for assisting state and local governments, and $1.4 billion for cleaning up Superfund toxic waste sites. Wastewater infrastructure needs and the future of Superfund are prominent topics. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3811/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2004 Budget
For FY2004, the President’s budget requested $7.6 billion in budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), $448 million (or 6%) less than the $8.1 billion current funding level. The House approved $8.0 billion in H.R. 2861 (H.Rept. 108-235) on July 25. Senate action is anticipated in September. The request consisted of $3.1 billion for EPA operating expenses, $3.1 billion for assisting state and local governments, and $1.4 billion for cleaning up Superfund toxic waste sites. Wastewater infrastructure needs and the future of Superfund are prominent topics. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3810/
The "Fiscal Cliff": Macroeconomic Consequences of Tax Increases and Spending Cuts
Report regarding the fiscal cliff, which is a set of tax increases and spending cuts that would substantially reduce the deficit in 2013. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc227799/
FY2011 Appropriations: A Side-by-Side Comparison of Key Proposals
FY2011 funding levels were not enacted in the 111th Congress. Thus, the debate over FY2011 appropriations has continued into the 112th Congress. This report is intended to facilitate comparison of three key spending proposals for FY2011-the Administration's budget request, H.R. 1, and S.Amdt. 149 to H.R. 1-to FY2010 enacted funding levels. The report begins with a brief analysis of how each proposal may impact the federal budget deficit. The bulk of the report consists of a funding table that details the recommended appropriations in these proposals, by subcommittee and bill title, and compares them with FY2010 appropriations. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc33029/
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2006
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7432/
V-22 Osprey Tilt-Rotor Aircraft
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7265/
Federal Research and Development: Budgeting and Priority-Setting Issues, 108th Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7864/
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2005
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7824/
Tax Expenditures Compared with Outlays by Budget Function: Fact Sheet
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7729/
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations: A Summary of the House- Passed and Senate-Reported Bills for FY2013
This report gives an overview of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appropriations bill, which includes funding for all components and functions of DHS, including Customs and Border Protection (CBP); Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); the Transportation Security Administration (TSA); Coast Guard (USCG); Secret Service (USSS); the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD), which includes Infrastructure Protection and Information Security (IPIS) and the Federal Protective Service (FPS); the Office of Health Affairs (OHA); the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS); the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC); the Science and Technology directorate (S&T); the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO); departmental management, Analysis and Operations (A&O), and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc87240/
Department of Homeland Security: FY2013 Appropriations
This report describes the FY2013 appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Administration requested $39.510 billion in adjusted net discretionary budget authority for DHS for FY2013, as part of an overall budget of $59.501 billion (including fees, trust funds, and other funding that is not appropriated or does not score against the budget caps). The request amounts to a $90 million, or a 0.2%, decrease from the $39.600 billion enacted for FY2012 through the consolidated appropriations act (P.L. 112-174). digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc122234/
The Budget Control Act of 2011: Budgetary Effects of Proposals to Replace the FY2013 Sequester
Report that provides information on the levels of deficit reduction if the Budget Control Act's (BCA) automatic cuts are implemented as under current law and contrasts that with the alternative proposals offered by some Members of Congress and President Obama. It also discusses specific determinations made by the Office of Management and Budget regarding the exempt/non-exempt status of certain programs, as well as a discussion of information to be disclosed regarding the FY2013 BCA sequester impact. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc227783/
DHS Headquarters Consolidation Project: Issues for Congress
This report outlines the policy considerations to be evaluated in deciding whether to continue funding the consolidated Department of Homeland Security (DHS) headquarters, and to explore some of the benefits and consequences of several possible ways forward. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc227811/
A Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment: Background and Congressional Options
One of the most persistent political issues facing Congress in recent years is whether to require that the budget of the United States be in balance. Although a balanced federal budget has long been held as a political ideal, the accumulation of large deficits in recent years has heightened concern that some action to require a balance between revenues and expenditures may be necessary. The debate over a balanced budget measure actually consists of several interrelated debates, which this report addresses. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs392/
A Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment: Background and Congressional Options
One of the most persistent political issues facing Congress in recent decades is whether to require that the budget of the United States be in balance. Although a balanced federal budget has long been held as a political ideal, the accumulation of large deficits in recent years has heightened concern that some action to require a balance between revenues and expenditures may be necessary. This report provides an overview of the issues and options that have been raised during prior consideration of proposals for a balanced budget constitutional amendment. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc96697/
V-22 Osprey Tilt-Rotor Aircraft
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2049/
V-22 Osprey Tilt-Rotor Aircraft
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3624/
Defense Budget: Long-Term Challenges for FY2006 and Beyond
This report reviews long-term trends in the defense budget and discusses the challenges Congress and the Defense Department may face in trying to adjust plans in the face of fiscal constraints. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6490/
The 0.38 Percent Across-the-Board Cut in FY2000 Appropriations
This report outlines cuts made in the federal budget for FY2000. The 0.38% cut was expected to yield savings of $2.4 billion in budget authority and $1.4 billion in outlays for the fiscal year. Departments with cuts in excess of $100 million included the Departments of Defense, Transportation, Health and Human Services, and Education. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1083/
The Natural Resources and Environment Function in the FY2000 Federal Budget: A Description of Programs and Funding
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1274/
The Natural Resources and Environment Function in the FY2003 Federal Budget: An Overview of Programs and Funding
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3293/
The Natural Resources and Environment Function in the FY2003 Federal Budget: An Overview of Programs and Funding
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3294/
The Natural Resources and Environment Function in the FY2003 Federal Budget: An Overview of Programs and Funding
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3295/
V-22 Osprey Tilt-Rotor Aircraft
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6340/
Federal Budget: Social Spending Targets in the FY 1999 House Budget Resolution
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs548/
Improper Payments and Recovery Audits: Legislation, Implementation, and Analysis
This report discusses the reports on improper payments and recovery audits that were first issued for FY2004 and the efforts to reduce and ultimately eliminate billions of dollars in improper payments made by federal agencies each fiscal year, Congress passed the Improper Payments Information Act (IPIA; P.L. 107-300; 116 Stat. 2350) in 2002. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc267793/
Magnetic Fusion: The DOE Fusion Energy Sciences Program
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1666/
Magnetic Fusion: The DOE Fusion Energy Sciences Program
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1667/
Magnetic Fusion: The DOE Fusion Energy Sciences Program
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2675/
Environmental Protection Agency: An Analysis of Key FY1999 Budget Issues
On February 2, 1998, the President requested $7.8 billion for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in FY1999. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported S. 2168 (S.Rept. 105-216) on June 12; the full Senate passed the bill on July 17. The House Committee reported H.R. 4194 (H.Rept. 105-610) on July 8, 1998; the full House passed it on July 29; and the Senate passed it on July 30 after incorporating S. 2168's provisions. During the week of October 6, the House and Senate approved the conference report, H.Rept. 105-769, which includes $7.5 billion, thus clearing the bill for the President's signature of October 21 (P.L. 105-276). The Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-277) added $30 million more in FY1999 funds. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs556/
Environmental Protection Agency: FY1998 Budget
EPA appropriations are included in the annual VA-HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriation Bill. Two major issues were whether Superfund cleanups should be accelerated in the absence of statutory reforms and whether the requested state assistance funds are adequate. Because the House and Senate were in agreement on not granting the requested 50% increase in Superfund and in passing increased state funds, the chief conference issue was expected to focus on the roughly $225 million difference between the House and Senate versions. However, a veto threat over Superfund program funding made this a key conference issue. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs396/
Environmental Protection Agency: FY1998 Budget
EPA appropriations are included in the annual VA-HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriation Bill. Two major issues were whether Superfund cleanups should be accelerated in the absence of statutory reforms and whether the requested state assistance funds are adequate. Because the House and Senate were in agreement on not granting the requested 50% increase in Superfund and in passing increased state funds, the chief conference issue focused on the roughly $225 million difference between the House and Senate versions. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs554/
Defense Budget for FY2003: Data Summary
This report is designed to be a readily accessible source of facts and figures on the FY2003 defense budget. Part I presents basic data on the national defense budget request, including figures on budget authority and outlays for the Department of Defense and for the national defense budget function. Part II shows trends in overall defense spending, including figures on the growth and decline of defense spending, on defense outlays as a share of federal expenditures, on defense outlays as a share of gross domestic product, and on foreign military spending. Part III defines key defense budget terms. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2514/
Uncertainty in Budget Projections
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1617/
Defense Research: DOD's Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Program
On June 27, the Bush Administration released an amended FY2002 budget for the Department of Defense (DOD). The amended budget requests a total of $328.9 billion for DOD, an additional $18.4 billion above the Administration’s “Blueprint” budget released in April. The amended budget included an additional $5.6 billion for DOD’s Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) program. This raises the FY2002 RDT&E request to $47.4 billion, $6.3 billion above the total obligational authority available for RDT&E in FY2001. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1557/
Defense Research: DOD's Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Program
Congress supports the research and development efforts of the Department of Defense (DOD) with a Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) appropriation. The appropriation primarily supports the development of the nation’s future military hardware and software and the technology base upon which those products rely. It is the federal government’s single largest research and development account. Besides supporting the nation’s military needs, some of the technology developed with RDT&E funds spills over into the commercial sector. For these reasons, RDT&E funding draws a considerable amount of attention within Congress each year. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2412/
Defense Research: DOD's Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Program
Congress supports the research and development efforts of the Department of Defense (DOD) with a Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) appropriation. The appropriation primarily supports the development of the nation’s future military hardware and software and the technology base upon which those products rely. It is the federal government’s single largest research and development account. Besides supporting the nation’s military needs, some of the technology developed with RDT&E funds spills over into the commercial sector. For these reasons, RDT&E funding draws a considerable amount of attention within Congress each year. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2413/
Defense Research: DOD's Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Program
Congress supports the research and development efforts of the Department of Defense (DOD) with a Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) appropriation. The appropriation primarily supports the development of the nation’s future military hardware and software and the technology base upon which those products rely. It is the federal government’s single largest research and development account. Besides supporting the nation’s military needs, some of the technology developed with RDT&E funds spills over into the commercial sector. For these reasons, RDT&E funding draws a considerable amount of attention within Congress each year. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2414/
Defense Research: DOD's Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Program
Congress supports the research and development efforts of the Department of Defense (DOD) with a Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) appropriation. The appropriation primarily supports the development of the nation’s future military hardware and software and the technology base upon which those products rely. It is the federal government’s single largest research and development account. Besides supporting the nation’s military needs, some of the technology developed with RDT&E funds spills over into the commercial sector. For these reasons, RDT&E funding draws a considerable amount of attention within Congress each year. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4160/
Defense Research: DOD's Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Program
Congress supports the research and development efforts of the Department of Defense (DOD) with a Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) appropriation. The appropriation primarily supports the development of the nation’s future military hardware and software and the technology base upon which those products rely. It is the federal government’s single largest research and development account. Besides supporting the nation’s military needs, some of the technology developed with RDT&E funds spills over into the commercial sector. For these reasons, RDT&E funding draws a considerable amount of attention within Congress each year. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4161/
Defense Research: DOD's Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Program
Congress supports the research and development efforts of the Department of Defense (DOD) with a Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) appropriation. The appropriation primarily supports the development of the nation’s future military hardware and software and the technology base upon which those products rely. It is the federal government’s single largest research and development account. Besides supporting the nation’s military needs, some of the technology developed with RDT&E funds spills over into the commercial sector. For these reasons, RDT&E funding draws a considerable amount of attention within Congress each year. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4162/
Defense Research: DOD's Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Program
Congress supports the research and development efforts of the Department of Defense (DOD) with a Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) appropriation. The appropriation primarily supports the development of the nation’s future military hardware and software and the technology base upon which those products rely. It is the federal government’s single largest research and development account. Besides supporting the nation’s military needs, some of the technology developed with RDT&E funds spills over into the commercial sector. For these reasons, RDT&E funding draws a considerable amount of attention within Congress each year. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4163/